User talk:Kittybrewster: Difference between revisions

; Archives
	Archive 1; ;

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 16:57, 29 March 2007

(Registered users only) Leave a message .

Please note: I reserve the right to remove and/or edit and/or merge comments on this page. I welcome folks correcting my numerous spelling mistakes whether on talk pages or otherwise.

Murder vs killing

In reference to the recent edit war(s) you have been involved in over use of "murder" over "killing" (or words to that effect), please comment on the issue here so that we might come to a conclusion. Thank you. Logoistic 01:01, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RepublicUK

Final warning issued; if he does it again, to you or anyone else, please let me know and I'll block him to make it stop. If I knew for sure he was a sock - certainly looks like one - I'd block him straight-out, but I can't figure out who he might be. Do you have any idea? He seems to have some particular complaint with you, so I thought you might have a solid guess, at which point we can do a checkuser and look for a long-term solution. | Mr. Darcy talk 16:19, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I'll ask C-R. If it happens again, let me know, as it looks to me like RepUK is increasing his disruption as he goes. | Mr. Darcy talk 16:28, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

He created his User page with "I represent the UK organisation Republic which can be found at www.republic.org.uk ". Does this mean he has come to Wikipedia with an object in mind? Seems like it. David Lauder 20:42, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

He looks like a sock-puppet to me.--Major Bonkers 22:11, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Who do you think he could be??????--Vintagekits 22:13, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Vintage, I prefer that you do not leave comments on my talk page. 'Crucified on a cross' is a tautology. - Kittybrewster 22:31, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Bonkers that he's an established user, but I don't see anyone with a similar editing pattern, and can't block him just on that whiff of a suspicion. If any of you has a solid guess as to his identity - it's not Vintagekits, I've already examined that possibility due to their similar comments on the open AfD - let me know or, if you're not comfortable doing it openly, just email me. | Mr. Darcy talk 14:27, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Im flattered, I truly am, I've been here a couple of weeks and you consider me to be an established user. Please don't talk about me behind my back like little school children.RepublicUK 04:17, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Protestant zealot

Resolved

I forgot about this. The person I was referring to was Alexander Arbuthnot (1538 - 1583) "an eminent divine, and zealous promotor of the Protestant Reformation in Scotland", who was the second son of Andrew Arbuthnot of Pitcarles, who in turn was the fourth son of Sir Robert Arbuthnot of that Ilk. His mother was Elizabeth, daughter of James Strachan of Monboddo. Does that assist you? My source is Anderson. David Lauder 20:56, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. :) - Kittybrewster 21:08, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Gillis Baronets

Resolved

It doesn't look like it. The creator, User:Duiek, seems to have edited and created lots of pages concerning this family (including saying that one of them was Vice-Admiral of Scotland, and that one of them is an entrepreneur (Googling suggests the company concerned, W. M. Gulliksen, does actually exist, but doesn't suggest it's notable in any way)). The 2nd Baronet is supposed to have married Anne, daughter of the 4th Earl of Findlater, but my sources say that that nobleman had no daughter of that name, and I can't see any relative of any of the Earls marrying anyone called Gillis. My gut reaction would be that it's a couple of vanity articles concerning a non-notable American family (one of whom is presumably the editor concerned) together with a completely invented illustrious family history. Proteus (Talk) 23:28, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Email

I have received an email in your name. I wonder if you could confirm that you have sent this. Also, I wonder if you'd consider changing the colour of the message bar at the top of the page. It looks just like the official "new message" box, but it is obviously conveying your own content. A wide variety of wonderful hues can be chosen from and the appropriate number inserted in the coding. See Web_colours#Color_Table Tyrenius 23:23, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I confirm I wrote to you and copied it to him. Colour change, no problem but I don't know how to. - Kittybrewster 23:37, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll reply by email. Let me know if you want a different colour! Tyrenius 05:12, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I thought this background colour might be easier on the eye, and "message" needs to be in a different colour if you want people to click on it to bring up an edit box, but revert if you prefer. Tyrenius 00:55, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Astrotrain

I noticed you posted in the talk page. The normal procedure is to state your view in the outside view section. See Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Jance and Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Essjay. The idea is to gain consensus, so individual sections do not have a "disagree" option as with AfD for example. The alternative view is stated separately. Users can then choose to endorse whichever view(s) they choose. Tyrenius 23:41, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I thought about it and clearly (not for the first time in my life) jumped the wrong way. I have fixed it. - Kittybrewster 23:45, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Complicated business at times. I removed "disagree" as this is meant to be your statement on Astrotrain (and the relevant situation), not a !vote as such on the opening statement. I hope this is OK. Tyrenius 23:56, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

William Arbuthnot (artillery officer)

Vintagekits isn't disrupting this. He's quite entitled to place a nn tag if he wishes, or a prod or take it to AfD, if he thinks any of these things are merited. He is proceeding very prudently with merely the lowest level to start with. This is the normal business of editing, and as long as it is done for sincere reasons, rather than overt and deliberate disruption, there is no problem, even if the person is mistaken. In the lack of evidence to the contrary, we AGF. There has to be a "cut off" point where military and aristocracy don't make the threshold. I am inclined to think this subject does, per commanding a large body of men (in this case a whole branch of the army), so might well be a resounding keep if it went to AfD, but I could be wrong. There are probably more dubious examples, however. Tyrenius 01:15, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I accept he is entitled to place a nn tag and that this is prudent/ low level. It seems to me strange that there are folks who question notability of a general while contributing to articles for young men who achieved nothing other than (the dubious honour of) getting shot. I have no doubt this article would survive an afd, but what it really needs is not an nn tag (in my opinion) but a "could use expanding" tag. I will work on that when time allows. Meanwhile [note to self] I must stop feeling VK is stalking me. - Kittybrewster 18:20, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

J R Gillis

Resolved

(from User talk:Quarl) Thank you. Would you like to tell him? (If he doesn't know already). Dieuk seems remarkably dilligent if he is not J R Gillis. - Kittybrewster 09:51, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Kittybrewster, I was hoping someone else would pursue it so I didn't have to :) —Quarl ^(talk) 2007-03-05 08:55Z

Done. - Kittybrewster 18:26, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Minor edits

Resolved

Please don't label additions to talk pages as minor edits, as some users turn off minor edits on their watchlist. Details of what constitutes a minor edit are at WP:MINOR. Thanks. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 01:12, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Core biographies

I noticed you set the core parameter for John Arbuthnot to yes. I'm awfully sorry, but I'm afraid the Core Biographies project is no longer accepting any suggestions to change the list for the time being. I have changed the core parameter to no per this statement. Er rab ee 12:48, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Crest

You seem to have the details per your post on the French wiki wrt the colours for the crest so I don't quite follow the question. Bit surprised about the colours given as I'm used to seeing sea dogs in vert and or. Alci12 18:28, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I copied the blazon from Burke's. - Kittybrewster 10:13, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh I wasn't doubting the accuracy of what you said just an unusual colour Alci12 11:50, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Minor edits

You've marked a lot of edits as minor, which aren't. Minor edits are trivial details, such as spelling correction, grammar, punctuation, wikilinks, typos etc. If there's any doubt, don't mark as minor, as some editors do not have minor edits on their watch list. Please check your preference settings. Click "my preferences" at the top of the page, then click "editing". Make sure that the box next to "Mark all edits minor by default" is NOT ticked. It is useful to make sure that the box next to "Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary" is ticked. Tyrenius 01:02, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done. - Kittybrewster 10:13, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. It's also greatly encouraged and helpful to other editors to include a summary of the edit (or some key text from it) in the edit summary box, which is the small box under the main edit box. See Wikipedia:Help:Edit summary. Edits without clear summaries are also likely to incur greater scrutiny from the Recent changes patrol. However, this is an optional action and there are no penalties involved (although it does become a significant issue in applications for adminship). Tyrenius 23:55, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No chance of my wanting to be an admin. Absolutely sub zero. - Kittybrewster 23:57, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lol. I didn't imagine it. Info included for completeness. Tyrenius 00:43, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Leathers Arms

Any ideas where I might find the Leathers family arms to add to Frederick Leathers, 1st Viscount Leathers? Weggie 12:33, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is the Viscount an armiger? You cannot just attribute Arms to him because the surname is the same. David Lauder 13:04, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've no idea to be honest, how do I find out? Weggie 13:25, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is no armigerous family of Leathers in the General Armory of England, Scotland, and Ireland by Messrs., John & John Bernard Burke, 3rd edition, London, 1844. David Lauder 13:48, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh well. Thanks for your help Weggie 13:50, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, he is armigerous. I will email you the details. - Kittybrewster 14:00, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oops. I can't. Please email me. - Kittybrewster 14:34, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Will do so tonight (just getting the Wiki-email validation thing sorted as I've not switched it on before) Weggie 14:36, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Land magnate

I was interested in this disambiguation. The whole problem with that family is for centuries the eldest son was called Robert. Most were also knights, and they all had the same feudal baronial/territorial designation. It is a headache! David Lauder 14:32, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

One is a knight of course. But the comma seemed inadequate. - Kittybrewster 14:35, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Baronet AfD

I have just come across a deletion nomination for Sir Keith Arbuthnot, Bt. You may wish to comment (here, my Talk Page, or elsewhere) on my remarks on that. I think the AfD is wrong. David Lauder 13:05, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sir Norman Stronge, 8th Baronet

I think it's shaped up nicely, so please do initiate a WP:Peer review. It could probably do with more in the family section and some more personal information. Tyrenius 01:16, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I will have a go. - Kittybrewster 10:16, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Think we need slightly more on his war service as well - nearly there though Weggie 11:59, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Medal
At first I thought it might have been his baronet's badge but obviously not if he didn't inherit the title until 1939 and the photo was taken in the '20s. It looks a bit like the Belgian Croix de Guerre which he was awarded, but I'm not sure if that's only worn on the chest (?) It is a bit hard to make out too. Maybe you could direct the question to Wikipedia:WikiProject Orders, Decorations, and Medals. Thanks, Craigy (talk) 21:46, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

More on Scotland

I wondered if you might care to update the style and content of these, or pass onto someone else who might be interested. A lot of text is from the 100 year old Encyclopædia Britannica Eleventh Edition. What was then obviously considered the finest writing needs considerable revision to conform to wikipedia policies...

Tyrenius 02:19, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Notability tags

Pleae read up on what the notability tags are for before continually removing them without improving the article. By simply removing the tags you are forcing me to AfD the articles. regards--Vintagekits 00:32, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

you are supposed to use the "expand" tags on a short article where there is notability - these articles that you are adding them to do not have obvious notability - please focus on proving notability instead of thinking that this is an attack on the articles.--Vintagekits 00:35, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

All peers are obviously notable. They have a role in Parliament. Also all Lord Mayors and all 1st Baronets; they are not made Baronets for being shot at. - Kittybrewster 01:06, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not the place for personal opinions to override factual realities. David Lauder 17:26, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

3RR warning

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Sir Henry Chamberlain, 2nd Baronet. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content which gains a consensus among editors. Thank you.

I appreciate the difficulty of the situation, but edit-warring is no solution. Since there appears to be no previous warning and no previous offence, I have issued only a warning rather than a block, but other admins may make a different judgment. Please, don't engage in edit warring: the Three-revert rule is an important one, and you have run it close over a long series of articles. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 01:29, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate the warning. I warned myself! I was wholly unaware that I had reverted excessively if I did - and if I did I unreservedly apologise. I took the view that these nn tags should he deleted or changed into expand tags a.s.a.p. lest they become forgotten. I think the fundamental problem is that VK believes notability attaches to people who get shot by the police (he may be right) while he does not accord the same level of notability to, for example, Lord Mayors. He is unaware that Lord Mayors have all achieved notability in their own field before becoming Lord Mayor. If he were to tag them "expand", I would agree. As for Barons, I think he is just unaware of the way the House of Lords works/worked. The great thing is that we can now all take a deep breath and start a discussion on notability. - Kittybrewster 12:28, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

USER: VINTAGEKITS

I filed a complaint against User:Vintagekits for his mass spamming and bad faith PRODing. Thanks for rv his abuses but you shouldn't have had to do all that work, and not all those pages need expanding anyway.

I think he deserves to be blocked indefinitely or for a lengthy period for what he did/does/will do. Don't you agree? We both know his history of pro-PIRA slants, etc. We both know he is going to continue doing this sort of thing or perpetrate other sorts of abuses.

Why don't you lodge a serious complaint as well to the Administrators or ArbCom committee??

Pls. respond on my talk page if you care to. Yours, O'Donoghue 01:31, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

He is now attacking my articles deliberately. See Broun Baronets.David Lauder 23:03, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RFC FOR VINTAGEKITS

You forgot to sign your statement on the RfC for Vintagekits. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Kittybrewster/VK_rfc O'Donoghue 13:09, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have not yet made a statement. - Kittybrewster 19:24, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect the problem is that nobody knows it's there; it doesn't seem to be linked from anywhere but your user page. If you want to attract outside interest to something, mentioning it on a relevant talk page is often a good idea. If there are at least two people who agree that there's a problem, and the RfC is certified (or you think it will be certified very soon), you should post it to WP:RFC, rather than leaving it in your userspace and hoping somebody notices it. Hope that helps! --ais523 14:31, 12 March 2007 (U T C)

Actually, seems that was O'Donoghue's helpme in your userspace (I misread the history), but I'll leave this here because you might find it relevant. --ais523 14:37, 12 March 2007 (U T C)

If you want the RfC for Vintagekits to proceed you must sign off/endorse under the section called Users certifying the basis for this dispute. Thanks!O'Donoghue 17:41, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't - yet. Gathering data. - Kittybrewster 17:43, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK- when you do the section is "Requests for comment/User conduct".O'Donoghue 17:44, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I can tell, User:O'Donoghue has tried to file the RfC anyway, and I've fixed it for them per a helpme request (as best as I can without admin tools); I also removed the 'this is a draft' line because the page was linked from RfC and people were ignoring it anyway. (Your user subpage was linked - via an external link - from WP:RFC/USER for a time.) As far as I can tell, it meets the criteria for being open even though you haven't opened it, which is a pretty unusual situation; I'm a bit confused as to do now, so I'm just posting here to let you know what the status quo is so you can make up your own mind. Hope that helps! --ais523 18:11, 12 March 2007 (U T C)

Removed. Not close to being useful yet. - Kittybrewster 19:22, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Back to the headaches

Please see my comments in User_talk:Tyrenius#I_was_writing_this_the_other_night_as_I_got_blocked. You can't have it both ways. Either Vintagekits stays off your page, except where unavoidable, and vice versa. Or not. But there's not one rule for him and one for you. The copyright issue can be discussed on an article talk page, if necessary, where other interested editors can also be made aware. Tyrenius 01:22, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that the comments should have been on N Stronge's page. I pasted them there, editing out the sniping. VK has never asked me not to post on his page. I guess he has now! - Kittybrewster 01:28, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Article naming for Baronets

Please folks, centralise this discussion rather than splatting it over a dozen article talk pages. I suggest Category_talk:Baronets. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 15:47, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Earls

I know you are a prolific contributor to articles about Baronets etc, so I ask you for guidance. While doing checking of random articles for referencing, I found a category of Earls: Category:Earldoms which sounded like they were taken from some print or online source, but the first several I looked at had no sources listed, so I tagged thm as "unreferenced" and moved on. Then I found Earl of Holland which cited a web page: Leigh Rayment's Peerage Pages ^{[self-published source]} ^{[better source needed]} . I find it appears to be just someone's webpage. Would you consider it to be a reliable source satisfying WP:ATT ? Wouldn't these titles/persons be in the more standard peerage books? I do not see where he cites to a printed source. Thanks. Edison 21:10, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes the Earldoms will be in Burke's Peerage, Burke's Extinct Peerage, etc. But I am not aware of any source other than Rayment which seeks to collate them all. He makes mistakes but they are astonishingly rare. It is a source to trust. User:Proteus is an expert on this question. - Kittybrewster 21:15, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Final warning not to canvas

You have been warned previously not to canvas.[1] You have recently left 13 identical messages on user pages.[2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] This is to notify them of a MOS debate on Honorific prefixes No.2[15] This is a debate you started and which is currently in between reverse (your wish) and no consensus. You have clearly notified people whom you estimate may well be favourable to your position. I notice you have not notified other editors who are known to take an interest but who are likely not to be favourable to your position. This is clearly an attempt to raise support for your position and subvert the normal process of reaching consensus. It is unacceptable to do this. I trust we will not see a repeat. Please study Wikipedia:Canvassing, which states amongst other points:

Don't attempt to sway consensus by encouraging participation in a discussion by people that you already know have a certain point of view.

An acceptable means of notifying users of an issue is to post in a public forum, such as a project page.

Tyrenius 23:36, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This blatant canvassing, which appears to be an exercise in vote-stacking, was notified to me on my talk page. Tyrenius has beaten me to it in issuing a well-deserved final warning, so all I can do is to add my support to the warning, and assure you that I will try to monitor for any future attempts at vote-stacking.

If you are going to notify others about such discussions, please be aware that while some editors regard any such notifications as canvassing, there is a clear consensus that selective notification of potential "allies" is unacceptable as disruptive. It would be helpful for you to post here an assurance that there will be no further attempts at vote-stacking. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 10:48, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Duff Baronets

Resolved

Agree, I wasn't very happy with it although in all honesty I thought it was difficult to read also before my changes. Please feel free to make the changes you feel are necessary to make the page easier to read. Regards, Tryde 07:43, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism

I've vandalised your User page for you!--Major Bonkers (talk) 14:06, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. - Kittybrewster (talk) 22:59, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Summers Baronets

Hello again. Summers Baronets needs to be removed from List of extant Baronetcies. Do we have to manually change all the order of precedence numbers in the list or is there a more sophisticated way of doing this. Regards, Tryde 16:01, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know of a more sophisticated way. - Kittybrewster (talk) 22:58, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have corrected the numbering. Tryde 08:10, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A Goodbye

Just a quick message to say goodbye as I am leaving my Wikipedia account (reasons at my user page). I would also like to say well done for all your wonderful work on Wikipedia. Despite the many hassels you get, notably from User:Vintagekits about the baronets, you always remain calm and continue. I have not got your patience and have had enough of hassels from many people; Im also starting a new 9-5 job this month so won't have the hours I have now. Anway, goodbye and keep up the excellant work. --Berks105 20:50, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I proberly won't be able to stop myself looking occasionally, I will be worried about the pages I put so much effort into being vandalised! Bye. --Berks105 21:05, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

hCard microformat in Template:Infobox Biography

Hi,

I see that you;re an editor of Template:Infobox Biography. Would you be interested in helping to add the hCard microformat (see also Wikipedia:WikiProject_Microformats) to that? I can advise on the required mark-up, but I'm not familiar with template code editing. Andy Mabbett 11:10, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

VKits

Whatever became of the request for comment for Vintagekits?--Counter-revolutionary 18:03, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It can wait. It is not ready to float. Real life takes priority. - Kittybrewster (talk) 18:48, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh yes, of course, I just wasn't sure whether it had been launched or not. --Counter-revolutionary 19:40, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lumsden

I'm afraid I don't know enough to comment on it. It seems sourced, though, and there's nothing in it that instantly jumps out as absurd. I don't think being a former feudal baron is worth mentioning, however. Proteus (Talk) 13:03, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lionel Phillips

Hi and thanks for the message! Peremptory, terse, discourteous AND arrogant AND a hypocrite. I've had a long life in the world of science and have a holy respect for good logic and reasoned thinking, but I also know that the truly knowledgeable people, in all walks of life, without exception, are patient and sensitive when it comes to sharing their expertise. I have no patience with bullies. Having said that, I would like to have a good working relationship with fellow editors who are truly interested in improving articles and not just putting their stamp of authority on everything. Do let me know if I can help in any way. Paul venter 11:01, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Great. I have not understood some of the reverting you have done on this article. But together we are all making progress. Do bear in mind WP:NPA. - Kittybrewster (talk) 21:52, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Peerage

Looking at the worklists (Index · Statistics · Log) I seem to have got some English monarchs tagged, because they were also dukes or what have you. An easy way to get around this (rather than reverting those edits) would be to have the project template make the peerage WikiProject mutually exclusive to Royalty/British Royalty, i.e. if royalty is yes or british royalty is yes the peerage-work-group=yes parameter gets ignored.

Would this be acceptable, or are there articles which are genuinely in the scope of both WikiProject British Royalty and WikiProject Peerage? --kingboyk 14:40, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, the logic is right. They are covered by both projects. :) - Kittybrewster (talk) 21:50, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for clearing that up.

My bot has now done all the categories you requested. I trust that's all, but if not you know where to make the request for further categories :) --kingboyk 16:57, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 245: / Line 245: @@
 Would this be acceptable, or are there articles which are genuinely in the scope of both WikiProject British Royalty and WikiProject Peerage? --[[User:Kingboyk|kingboyk]] 14:40, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
 :No, the logic is right. They are covered by both projects. :)  - [[User:Kittybrewster|Kittybrewster ]]<small>[[User_talk:Kittybrewster| (talk)]]</small> 21:50, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
+::Thanks for clearing that up.
+::My bot has now done all the categories you requested. I trust that's all, but if not you know where to make the request for further categories :) --[[User:Kingboyk|kingboyk]] 16:57, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Revision as of 16:57, 29 March 2007

Murder vs killing

RepublicUK

Protestant zealot

Gillis Baronets

Email

Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Astrotrain

Archive

William Arbuthnot (artillery officer)

J R Gillis

Minor edits

Core biographies

Crest

Minor edits

Leathers Arms

Land magnate

Baronet AfD

Sir Norman Stronge, 8th Baronet

More on Scotland

Notability tags

3RR warning

USER: VINTAGEKITS

RFC FOR VINTAGEKITS

Back to the headaches

Article naming for Baronets

Earls

Final warning not to canvas

Duff Baronets

Vandalism

Summers Baronets

A Goodbye

hCard microformat in Template:Infobox Biography

VKits

Lumsden

Categories

Lionel Phillips

Peerage